Where Political competitions are Won or Lost

Main menu

Post navigation

Supporters of the man made global warming conspiracy have finally found a way to win an argument — censor your opponents.

Reddit, one of the most popular websites on the Internet, declares itself as “passionately dedicated to free speech.” In a decision that makes mockery of that claim, a moderator of the site’s science forum decided that anyone who refused to toe the global warming alarmist line, should be banned. The move to limit free speech, debate and academic discussion was applauded by the king of global warming misinformation himself, Al Gore. “Climate deniers can no longer spread disinformation on @Reddit’s science forum,” Mr. Gore tweeted approvingly. Censorship is much easier than persuasion.

The last few years have been difficult for global warming theorists. The movement hit its pinnacle in 2006 when Al Gore’s infamous, and factually inaccurate, “Inconvenient Truth,” won the accolades of the Academy Awards and Sundance Film Festival. The premise of the film that the world is a ticking time bomb and has ten years to avoid disaster of man-created epidemic of floods, draughts and killer heat waves. The Mr. Gore and his ilk, the world has three years left before the bomb explodes and all hell breaks loose.

By 2007, Mr. Gore’s outrageous claims began to melt away. A British court documented at least nine significant errors in the film that the UK government admitted were inconsistent with mainstream scientific opinion. Other researchers documented over three dozen similar scientific errors and exaggerations.

The real inconvenient truth for Mr. Gore is that despite the claims that things would get worse, scientists have demonstrated that the world has not warned in the last 204 months. The world was told that the polar ice caps would be melted. Instead, we have seen the lowest temperatures ever recorded on the face of the earth, Polar Ice cap growth of nearly 50% and snow in Egypt for the first time in a century. Mr. Gore promised that we would see an unprecedented amount of hurricanes after he blamed the mister storm Katrina on global warming. 2013 was one of the quietest hurricane seasons in history.

Reddit is a privately owned website. It is free to develop policies as it sees fit. But the simple truth is that if proponents of the man-made global warming theory were correct they would welcome debate rather than try to stifle it. Censorship is a tool of those who cannot defend their positions.

Alarmists continue to push for radical policies to tax and regulate our way of life. They would prefer not to have to debate, yet alone defend their positions.

Every once in a while, a liberal writes a column thinking his logic will change the world, when in fact, it reveals more about the twisted logic of modern liberalism than convinces the world of the correctness of their worldview. New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristoff has done just that.

In an article entitled “Why Let the Rich Hoard All the Toys,” Kristoff, who is a millionaire, compares successful Americans to kindergarden kids who won’t share their “books, crayons and toys.” Funny, I don’t remember Kristoff sending me any checks or inviting me to live in his house.

Showing an incredible lack of economic understanding, Kristoff writes, “As I see it, the best way to create a more equitable society wouldn’t be Robin Hood-style redistribution, but a focus on inner-city and rural education — including early childhood programs — and job training. That approach would expand opportunity, even up the starting line, and chip away at cycles of poverty. If the cost means forcing tycoons to pay modestly higher taxes, so be it. The economy wouldn’t suffer.”

Kristoff believes is his politically palatable, citing a study from Harvard that shows that “90 percent of Americans preferred to live in a country with the Swedish distribution” of wealth.

And who is to pay for these programs that will show how shift the economic distribution of wealth in the United States? The taxpayers, of course, will see their wealth taken from them and redistributed to others.

Kristoff and all his liberal friends continue to fall prey to the “broken window fallacy.” In this instance, they see the supposed benefits of tax dollars spent on programs like job training but fail to see what could have been done with the tax dollars had they no been taken by the government.

Would new businesses have been created? Would people be hired? We will never know. If you believe that the American people know better than the government how to spend their own money, you would be, in Kristoff worldview, a kindergarden kid who won’t share his toys. The difference is — you earned it. They didn’t.

After getting his butt kicked at the first presidential debate, President Obama’s supporters are demanding that he be allowed to use a Teleprompter so as to not be at a disadvantage against Gov. Romney.

There was an age where liberals defended the First Amendment. Perhaps they did so as a guise to advance their progressive agenda. None the less, their defense of freedom of speech is now a thing of the past.

Consider the facts:

— An unknown man puts a video on YouTube. It gets 2,000 views when the Adminstration decides to blame the video for an outburst of anti-American protests across the Middle East and Muslim world. The government blames the film and apologizes for a citizens exercise of his First Amendment rights.

— The government demands YouTube pull the clip down and, to their credit, YouTube tells Obama to pound sand.

— The FBI “identifies” the producer of the film.

— The government then hauls the filmmaker in for an “interview.”

— Liberals demand that the United States enforce blasphemy laws against Islam. Bill Press of something called “Current TV” says,

“Now here’s the question though and the question that I ask you and it’s not an easy one, I understand that. What, if anything, should happen to the people who made this video? I gotta tell you, I think they are as guilty, that’s my opinion, I think they are as guilty as the terrorists who carried out those attacks against our embassy in Libya. Look, we don’t know everybody who was involved, but we’ve seen, I’ve seen some of them on television. This is a group of extremist, Muslim-hating, so-called Christians in southern California who are using their religion to stir up hatred against Islam. They’re basing this on their Christian beliefs. They are, I believe, every bit as guilty as al Qaeda members who, think about it, who use the Koran and abuse their religion to stir up hatred against the United States. These so-called Christians, anybody who uses religion to stir up hate, is not a true believer. And certainly Christians who do so are not true Christians.

So these so-called Christians using their faith to stir up hatred against another of the world’s great religions, it is absolutely disgusting and they’ve gotta know, they had to know what would result in that. After what happened with those Danish cartoons, right, or cartoons drawn for that Danish newspaper. After what happened with that nutjob Terry Jones down in Florida burning the Koran and people getting killed in Afghanistan over the protest that that, that that triggered. After what happened when we saw the video of American troops urinating on Muslim soldiers, right? After that, you had, they had to know that a video like this, not saying that the Muslims are not overreacting. I mean, they’re hypersensitive about this stuff, I mean, Jesus, you know, just cool it, right? I mean, we show Jesus naked all the time hanging on the cross.

But, at any rate, their reaction is way overblown. But these, I hate to call them Christians, these so-called Christians had to know that that video would result in certain parts of the world, it would result in violence, it would result in lives being lost. I think, again, they are every bit as guilty and I think the United States, this is not freedom of speech. It’s just the old thing, you can’t cry fire in a crowded theater and have people trampled to death and say, oh, I was just exercising my freedom of speech. This is an abuse of the First Amendment. It’s using, abusing their freedom of speech to cost innocent lives and to cause the taking of innocent lives in certain parts of the world. So, I think the United States ought to identify, yeah, we oughta be going after these terrorists that carried out the attacks in Libya and we are. I think we also ought to be identifying the people who made this video and go after them with the full force of the law and lock their ass up.

— The San Francisco Chronicle publishes an article entitled “Revisit Free Speech” advocating that free speech against Islam not be allowed.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. The president refuses to defend our freedoms. His supporters refuse to do the same. These are certainly perilous time for freedom.

The Obama Administration is an excuse machine. They have blamed Bush, tsunamis, hurricanes, ATM machines and now a YouTube video as excuses for their weakness and inability to govern effectively both domestically and internationally.

But lost in the finger-pointing is another dangerous threat to our liberties.

When President Obama was in the Senate and the Democrats were in the opposition, they were willing to criticize obvious abuses of civil liberties by the Bush Administration. But no longer. Obama has become a champion of the “security state.”

Now that Islamic radicals are in the street of Cairo, the Administration has decided to fight back — by shredding the First Amendment.

Yesterday, I spotlighted the unmourned casualty of Obama’s foreign policy/national security disaster bus: The First Amendment.

The LA Times is reporting that the White House pressured YouTube to censor the anti-Islam movie blamed for inciting the riots:

Administration officials have asked YouTube to review a controversial video that many blame for spurring a wave of anti-American violence in the Middle East.

The administration flagged the 14-minute “Innocence of Muslims” video and asked that YouTube evaluate it to determine whether it violates the site’s terms of service, officials said Thursday. The video, which has been viewed by nearly 1.7 million users, depicts Muhammad as a child molester, womanizer and murderer — and has been decried as blasphemous and Islamophobic.

YouTube blocked access to the video in Egypt and Libya, where protests in Benghazi erupted in violence that claimed the life of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other embassy workers. However, the video remains on the site. Protests have spread to Yemen, where hundreds stormed the U.S. Embassy.

Hillary Clinton is promising to use her power to“pressure” and shame private citizens into not producing similar films.

A true leader would defend our Constitution, defend the First Amendment and tell the Islamists to learn a lesson in freedom.

Brooklyn Rep. Yvette Clarke insisted before a national TV audience Tuesday night that there was still slavery in New York City in 1898 — and the oppressors were the Dutch.

The epic fail on basic US history came during an appearance on Stephen Colbert’s Comedy Central show, where the Crown Heights congresswoman was asked what she’d do if she were back in 1898, when Brooklyn surrendered its independence as a separate city.

“I would say to them, ‘Set me free,’ ” responded Clarke.

“From what?” asked the host.

“Slavery,” shot back Clarke, a three-term congresswoman, adding that it was the Dutch who were the slave masters in 1898, a good two centuries after they had left town.

Colbert seemed to try giving Clarke a chance to correct her massive flub, saying, “Slavery. Really? I didn’t realize there was slavery in Brooklyn in 1898.”

But Clarke stuck to her stunning screwup. “I’m pretty sure there was,” she said.